Guy Frye & Sons, Inc. v. Francis
This text of 86 S.E.2d 790 (Guy Frye & Sons, Inc. v. Francis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
A motion to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the greater weight of the evidence is directed to the sound discretion of the presiding judge, whose ruling, in the absence of abuse of discretion, is not reviewable on appeal. G.S. 1-207; Poniros v. Teer Co., 236 N.C. 145, 72 S.E. 2d 9; Goodman v. Goodman, 201 N.C. 808, 161 S.E. 686. See also Roberts v. Hill, 240 N.C. 373, bot. p. 380, 82 S.E. 2d 373.
Similarly, a motion for new trial on the ground of new evidence, discovered during the trial term, is addressed to the discretion of the trial judge, and his decision, whether granting or refusing the motion, is not reviewable in the absence of an abuse of discretion. Farris v. Trust Co., 215 N.C. 466, 2 S.E. 2d 363; Bullock v. Williams, 213 N.C. 320, 195 S.E. 791; Fleming v. R. R., 168 N.C. 248, 84 S.E. 270; Carson v. Dellinger, 90 N.C. 226.
In the case at hand abuse of discretion is not claimed by the appellant and has not been made to appear. It necessarily follows that the result of the trial must be upheld.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
86 S.E.2d 790, 242 N.C. 107, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guy-frye-sons-inc-v-francis-nc-1955.